312 Rhus glabra ab Edward L. Greene revisa 
A remote southwestern ally of R. glabra, with very definite specific 
marks, It is known to me only as collected by Mr. C. L. Pollard, 
August 11 to 12, 1896, no. 1261, the special locality, Agricultural College, 
Oktibbeha County, Mississippi. The type specimen in the National Her- 
barium. . 
The species must quite surpass R. glabra in beauty. Its narrow 
slender-pointed leaflets seem to droop from the rachis rather than to 
spread away from it horizontally. This, however, is characteristic of 
several other allies of R. glabra belonging to regions lying westward. 
3. Rhus ithacensis E. L. Greene, |. c., p. 178. 
All the parts smaller and more slender than in R. glabra, the branches 
not glaucous, seldom glaucescent; leaflets 13— 17, sessile by an abruptly 
acutish base, 6—7 cm long, saliently serrate, the serratures 13—15 on a 
side, upper face dull deep green, lower glaucous but less so than in R. 
glabra, the texture thinner; fruiting panicle small comparatively, long- 
peduncled, 12—18 cm long, oblong fusiform, not very compact, its bran- 
ches thinly tomentellous; drupelets below medium size, notably smaller 
than in R. glabra. 
Seems to take the place of R. glabra everywhere to the westward 
of the Alleghenies in western Pennsylvania and New York, and in 
northern Ohio. The station for the type is near Ithaca, New York, 
as the name might indicate; was collected at Fall Creek, September, 1893, 
by K. M, Wiegand. Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania, 1878, by 
P. E, Pierron, consisting of uppermost leaves and a panicle each of 
staminate and pistillate flowers. Elyria, Lorain County, northern Ohio, 
A. E. Ricksecker, August 1, 1894. 
Excellent specimens, true to the type, are in the Herbarium of the 
Geological Survey of Canada as follows: sheet 34165 from Sandwich, 
Ontario, by John Macoun, July, 1901; also another from Bellville, On - 
tario, by the same as early as 1867, this in male flower only. 
All the so-called Rhus glabra from the geographic region so indicated, 
differs from the southern R. glabra and the New England R. pyramidata 
in points quite sufficient to establish it in the rank of at least a strong 
subspecies. 
4. Rhus Ashei (Small) E. L. Greene, l. c., p. 179. 
Rhus Caroliniana Ashe, Bot. Gaz., XX, 548, 1895, not of Miller, Dict., 
1768. 
Schmaltzia Ashei Small, Fl., 729. 
In old fields and low woods of middle North Carolina, collected 
by Ashe, who correctly indicated it as a good new species but under a 
name long preoccupied. 
5. Rhus pyramidata E. L. Greene, |. c., p. 180. 
Both the shrub and its foliage smaller than in R. glabra, the mature 
leaves firmer, almost subcoriaceous, equally white with bloom beneath, 
the whole leaf 3 dm long or less; leaflets 17—21, sessile, oblong-lanceo- 
